知识产权冲突法适当论

发布时间：2017-12-31 14:08

  本文关键词：知识产权冲突法适当论　出处：《吉林大学》2017年博士论文　论文类型：学位论文

  更多相关文章： 知识产权 地域性 管辖权 法律适用 适当论

【摘要】：从冲突法的角度分析,知识产权是涉外民商事法律的特例,传统观念中对知识产权地域性的强调使得这个领域成为并不存在法律冲突的一隅,各个国家仅仅受理各自授予的知识产权产生的纠纷,并且适用内国法律予以解决。涉外知识产权的保护多年来一直遵循国际公约保护的路径,而这种保护使得涉外知识产权纠纷的解决在全球化语境和互联网语境之下遭遇尴尬。对知识产权地域性的系统分析发现,地域性不能构成知识产权受冲突法保护的障碍,知识产权长期与冲突法无缘是知识产权的无形性、所涉的公共利益性、主权观念、实践因素、人们的态度等多种因素互相结合共同导致,而所有这些因素中,最主要的原因是人们对于知识产权地域性的偏见。知识产权私权性质的确立、涉外知识产权领域的新情势、冲突法自身的优势以及国际社会的共同利益使得知识产权和冲突法存在连接的基础。由于各个国家知识产权在制度设计上的差异,无论是著作权,还是商标权和专利权,都会出现很多法律冲突,具体表现在知识产权的所有权、产生、效力、范围、转让、保护、终止等各个方面。知识产权在国际民商事实践日益紧密的今天,面临着新的语境,在管辖权、法律适用、争端解决模式、创制方式都取得了前所未有的发展。适当论由于丰富的内涵应当作为知识产权冲突法的指导理论,适当论不仅可以适用在知识产权的法律适用领域,还应适用在知识产权的管辖权领域。知识产权逐渐摆脱传统观念的束缚,各国开始着手对知识产权冲突法保护的研究和立法,历经多年的努力,已经取得了令人欣喜的成果,一些国家相继在立法中制定了冲突法规则;各国知识产权司法实践也逐渐在判例中突破了专属管辖的限制,在法律适用方面也有所转变;国际组织通过一系列国际性公约协调管辖权和法律适用;各国民间法律团体对知识产权的冲突法保护也给予持续的关注,取得了以ALI原则和CLIP原则和日韩知识产权国际私法原则为代表的较为优秀的研究成果,这几个研究成果以软法的形式出现,不具有强制的适用效力。涉外知识产权的管辖权和法律适用无论在理论方面还是实践方面都取得了较大的进步,但是也存在着很多缺陷。管辖权和法律适用高度一体化,一些国家普遍混淆了管辖权的选择和法律适用,立法管辖权和司法管辖权被专属管辖权同化。管辖权方面,一些国家基于先进的理论研究成果和丰富的司法实践逐渐突破了专属管辖的限制,而另外一些国家固守知识产权的地域性仍然坚持专属管辖,这些国家之间发生知识产权纠纷之后将会出现跛脚法律冲突,无法调和;国际社会不存在协调一致的管辖权规则以及国际协调的不足导致了管辖权方面的混乱,由此引发了诸多判决无法在其他国家得到承认和执行。在法律适用方面,一些国家坚持适用权利来源地法律,而另外一些国家坚持适用权利保护地法律,还有一些国家发展了当事人意思自治、最密切联系、结果选择等法律适用规则与方法,国际社会没有统一的法律适用规则导致了各个国家按照各自的偏好创制规则,同一案件在不同的国家审理将会出现完全不同的判决结果,国际私法所追求的无论案件在哪个国家审理、判决结果都具有一致性的目标在涉外知识产权领域无法达到。寻找适当的管辖法院和适当法,是国际私法的两大关怀。首先管辖权和法律适用应当分别来对待,以适当的理念确定适当的管辖法院和适当法。在管辖权方面,应当遵循适当的方式选择适当管辖法院。涉外知识产权合同纠纷首先应当由当事人协议管辖,这充分体现了契约自由和私法自治的理念,没有当事人的意思自治,建议由知识产权的实施地行使管辖权。当事人意思自治同样应当用来确定涉外知识产权侵权案件的管辖,但是在侵权领域,还应当划清当事人自治起决定性作用领域与国家主权应起决定性作用领域之间的界限;没有当事人意思自治的情况下,应当对传统的侵权管辖规则进行改良,使之适用在知识产权领域。知识产权的本体区分为所有权和产生、效力。涉外知识产权所有权纠纷的管辖要区分两种情况,单纯的所有权纠纷,不应该实行专属管辖,此时应当适用其他的管辖规则;如果知识产权的所有权诉讼和知识产权的注册、效力诉讼密不可分,那么基于合并管辖的优势,所有权诉讼与注册、效力诉讼均应当由知识产权注册国法院专属管辖。在知识产权的产生以及效力上,要区分注册性权利和非注册性权利,对于注册性权利,注册地法院应为适当的管辖法院;知识产权的效力作为侵权案件的先决案件,应突破专属管辖,适用侵权等其他的管辖规则。对于非注册性权利,当事人自由选择的法院应作为首要的管辖法院,如果当事人没有管辖权协议,被告的经常居住地法院是适当的管辖法院。互联网模式之下,应当将协议管辖作为首要的管辖方式,但是要对单边选择法院的标准予以明确。针对网络无所不在之侵权的特殊情况,采取CLIP中的集中管辖,由与侵权行为有实质影响的一国法院行使全部管辖权的重任是对互联网模式下产生新问题的及时规制。而规则之外,应当建立适当—协调的模式,加强国际协调,走多元化的路径。在涉外知识产权的法律适用方面,最初的讨论围绕着权利来源国法律和被请求保护国法律,后发展了当事人意思自治选择的法律、最密切联系地法律等多个法律适用规则。涉外知识产权的适当法要尽最大可能保证发达国家和发展中国家的利益得到同样的维护,制定的规则要有利于平衡多方的利益,要注意考虑知识产权自身的特征和性质对规则的影响,应当坚持国际私法中法律适用规则的多元化,采用法律适用的分割论。涉外知识产权合同的适当法应该确认意思自治原则的首要地位,适用当事人选择的法律;如果当事人之间没有法律选择协议或者协议无效,那么应当适用与涉外知识产权合同具有最密切联系的法律。而特征性履行方法可以作为确定最密切联系地的方式,但是要区分不同的情况分别确定。涉外知识产权侵权案件的适当法同样是在可以适用当事人意思自治原则的方面,适用当事人选择的法律,没有意思自治的,应当以被保护国法为基本原则,辅以最密切联系原则。同样,知识产权的本体区分为所有权和产生、效力。对于著作权的所有权纠纷,应该适用单一的作品创作时作者的住所地法,如果作者的住所地法与案件没有密切的联系,那么应该适用最密切联系原则确定应该适用的法律;而对于商标权和专利权等需要注册的权利,应该适用被请求保护国法确定知识产权的归属。涉外知识产权的其他本体关系应当适用保护国法。互联网模式之下,应当综合采用当事人意思自治、最密切联系、结果选择方法等多种方式。适当法之外,同时要加强国际协调,建立适当—协调的多边路径。知识产权冲突法的适当论结合了知识产权自身的特点和属性,权衡了所有法律参与人的得失,实现了国际私法正义效率的价值,在全球不同的法律体系、复杂的国际实践中进行总结和归纳,在中立的角度确定管辖和法律适用的适度和正当。知识产权冲突法的适当论不仅包括法律适用上的适当,还包括管辖权的适当,适当论跃出法律适用领域,适用在管辖权领域;知识产权冲突法的适当论是根据涉外知识产权的权利性质、法律关系的不同特点,秉承适当的理念解决管辖权和法律适用问题,这决定了知识产权冲突法的适当论必定不同于一般民商事领域;知识产权冲突法领域的适当论根据客观实际的变化而调整规则的适用、随着知识产权国际实践的变迁不断向前发展,这是适当论存在的客观现实基础;知识产权冲突法领域的适当论由于“适度”、“正当”的属性使得其规则契合了国际私法的价值目标;知识产权冲突法领域的适当论不仅包括冲突法,还应该推进统一实体法的发展,统一实体法由于直接规定了权利和义务是调整涉外知识产权最适当的法。
[Abstract]:From the analysis of the conflict of laws, intellectual property rights is a special case of foreign-related civil and commercial law, the traditional concept of emphasis on intellectual property has become a corner in this field does not exist the conflict of law, all countries only accept their awarded the intellectual property disputes, and apply laws to solve. Years of foreign intellectual property protection path to follow the International Convention on the protection of, and this makes the protection of foreign intellectual property disputes under the context of globalization and the context of the Internet suffered embarrassment. On intellectual property system analysis, regional intellectual property protection by law does not constitute barriers, intellectual property rights and the conflict of laws is no long-term intangible intellectual property the question of public interest, sovereignty, practical factors, factors of people's attitudes and common cause with each other. All of these factors, the main reason is that people with intellectual property bias. The establishment of intellectual property in the new situation, the field of foreign intellectual property rights, common interests conflict and its advantages in the international community that intellectual property rights in the connection and conflict of laws. Due to the differences in the national intellectual property system design the matter is copyright, or trademark right and patent right, there will be many conflicts of law, specifically in the ownership of intellectual property rights, effectiveness, scope, protection, transfer, termination and other aspects. The intellectual property rights in the international civil and commercial practice close today, facing the new context. The applicable law in the jurisdiction, the dispute settlement mode, creation way has made the hitherto unknown development. Because of the rich connotation of proper theory should be used as the guiding theory of intellectual property law, The appropriate theory can not only applicable law in the field of intellectual property rights, intellectual property rights should also be applicable in the field of jurisdiction. Intellectual property rights gradually get rid of the shackles of traditional ideas, countries began the research and legislation on intellectual property rights protection law, after years of efforts, has made gratifying achievements, some countries in legislation established in the conflict rules; judicial practice of intellectual property rights in the case of countries gradually broke the exclusive jurisdiction restrictions in applicable law change; international organizations through a series of International Convention for the coordination of the jurisdiction and legal protection; conflict of national civil law group of intellectual property rights also given sustained attention, made the more outstanding research results to the ALI principle and the principle of CLIP and Japan as the representative of international intellectual property law principle, the research results in Soft law is not applicable. The effectiveness of mandatory foreign-related intellectual property rights of jurisdiction and application of law both in terms of theory and practice has made great progress, but there are also many defects. Jurisdiction and application of law is highly integrated, some countries generally confused for selection and legal jurisdiction. The legislative jurisdiction and jurisdiction by exclusive jurisdiction. The jurisdiction of assimilation, some countries advanced theory research and judicial practice based on the rich gradually broke through the exclusive jurisdiction of the restrictions, and other regional countries to intellectual property rights still insist on exclusive jurisdiction, there will be a lame legal conflict between these countries, after intellectual property disputes can not be reconciled; the international community does not exist consistent rules of jurisdiction and lack of international coordination in the jurisdiction. The chaos, which caused many decisions cannot be recognized and enforced in other countries. In the application of the law, some countries adhere to the law applicable source of rights, while others insist on the law applicable to the protection of the rights, and some countries develop the autonomy of the parties, the most closely linked, the choice of applicable law rules and methods. In each country according to their own preferences rule, the international community has no unified legal rules in the same case different judgment results will appear in different countries, international private law to pursue the case regardless of the country in which the trial verdict has the consistency of goals can not be achieved in the field of foreign intellectual property rights. Looking for an appropriate and proper law under the jurisdiction of the court, is the two largest concern of private international law. Firstly, jurisdiction is right and law should be treated respectively, With the proper idea of determining appropriate and proper law under the jurisdiction of the court. The jurisdiction, should follow the appropriate way to choose the appropriate jurisdiction. Foreign intellectual property disputes should be governed by the agreement of the parties, which fully embodies the freedom of contract and the concept of autonomy of private law, without the autonomy of the parties, as suggested by the enforcement of intellectual property rights the exercise of jurisdiction. The autonomy of the parties should also be used to determine the jurisdiction of foreign-related IPR infringement cases, but also in the field of tort, should draw the party autonomy plays a decisive role in the field of national sovereignty and should play a decisive role in the field of boundaries between the autonomy of parties; no case should be rules to improve the traditional. The application in the field of intellectual property. The intellectual property rights body divided into ownership and production effect. Foreign-related intellectual property rights Under the jurisdiction of ownership disputes to distinguish two cases, simple ownership disputes, should not be the exclusive jurisdiction, the jurisdiction rules should apply to the other; if the ownership of the intellectual property litigation and intellectual property registration, the effectiveness of litigation are inseparable, so based on the combined advantages of litigation and jurisdiction, ownership registration, validity shall be by the intellectual property litigation registered in the exclusive jurisdiction of the court. In the formation of the intellectual property rights and the effectiveness, to distinguish between registered rights and non registered rights for the registration of rights, the court shall be registered under the jurisdiction of the court proper; validity of intellectual property rights as a prerequisite in cases of infringement cases, should break through the exclusive jurisdiction, infringement and other jurisdiction rules for non registered rights, the parties should be free to choose the court under the jurisdiction of the court of the first, if the parties have no jurisdiction by agreement, the defendant Ordinary residence court is under the jurisdiction of the court proper. The Internet mode, should be as the primary way of agreement jurisdiction jurisdiction, but the unilateral choice of court standards to be clear. According to the special situation of network omnipresent infringement, take centralized jurisdiction in CLIP, the task by a state court have substantial effect and infringement of the exercise all jurisdiction is timely regulation of new issues to the Internet mode. And the rules, should establish appropriate coordination mode, strengthen international coordination and diversification path. The application of the law in foreign-related intellectual property rights, the initial discussions around the country of origin of law and requested protection law, after the development of the autonomy of choice of law, the most closely linked to the law and other legal rules. The proper law of foreign-related intellectual property rights to the greatest extent possible to ensure the developed The state and the interests of the developing countries have the same maintenance, the rules should be conducive to balance the interests of the parties, should pay attention to consider the impact of characteristics and the nature of their own intellectual property rights of the rules, should adhere to the diversification of private international law in the legal rules, the laws applicable to the segmentation theory. The proper law of foreign-related intellectual property rights contract should be confirmed the primacy of the principle of autonomy, the choice of applicable law; if there is no agreement or the agreement is invalid choice of law between the parties, it shall apply with foreign-related intellectual property rights contract is most closely linked to the law. But the characteristic performance can be identified as the most closely linked to the way, but to distinguish between different situations. To determine the appropriate law of foreign-related intellectual property infringement cases is also can be applied to the principle of party autonomy, for the parties Choice of law, no autonomy, should be protected by law as the basic principle, supplemented by the principle of the closest connection. Similarly, the body is divided into intellectual property ownership and production effect. For the copyright ownership disputes, should be applied to single works for the law of domicile, if the author of the domicile law and cases are not closely linked, it should be applied to the principle of close contact should determine the applicable laws; and for trademark and patent registration rights, should apply lex protectionis to determine the intellectual property rights of ownership. Other ontology relation should be applied to the protection of foreign intellectual property law. The Internet mode, should be the autonomy of the parties, the most closely linked, the selection method of a variety of ways. The appropriate method, at the same time to strengthen international coordination, establish appropriate coordination of multi The side path of intellectual property conflicts. Appropriate combination characteristics and attributes of their own intellectual property rights, legal participants weighed all the pros and cons of justice, efficiency of international private law value in the legal system of global, international practice in the complex are summarized and concluded, in a neutral point of view to determine the applicable law and jurisdiction the moderate and proper. The appropriate theory of conflict of laws of intellectual property includes not only the legal application of the appropriate jurisdiction, including appropriate, proper application of the field out of law, applicable in the field of jurisdiction; conflict of law of intellectual property right is right according to the nature of foreign-related intellectual property rights, the different characteristics of the legal relationship, adhering to the appropriate the idea to solve the problem of the jurisdiction and the applicable law, which determines the appropriate intellectual property conflicts must be different from the general field of civil and commercial law; conflict of laws in the field of intellectual property. For when the change according to the objective reality and the adjustment rules, with the change of the international practice of intellectual property development, it is appropriate to the objective and realistic foundation of existence; the conflict of laws in the field of intellectual property right on the "appropriate", "legitimate" attribute makes fit the value goal of the private international law rules on the appropriate; the conflict of laws in the field of intellectual property includes not only the conflict of laws, should also promote the development of the uniform substantive law, because of the direct provision of uniform substantive law rights and obligations is the most appropriate adjustment of foreign intellectual property law.

【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D997.1
，

本文编号：1360082